[quote=njtosd][quote=SK in CV][quote=njtosd]
You’re entitled to a fair cross section of the community where the court convenes – not peers. For example – my peers might be lower middle class white women. Do you really think thats the jury i would get? I dont believe there is any Supreme Court case where there is a holding (not dictum) where it was found that you’re entitled to a jury of your peers. The lack of PC -ness of the phrase is kind of a give away.[/quote]
Yes, I’d call it dictum. And a pretty narrow definition of “peers”. Specifically, race cannot be a proper cause for exclusion from jury pools. Sex can. Education can. Age can. See Strauder v. West Virginia:
The very idea of a jury is a body of men composed of the peers or equals of the person whose rights it is selected or summoned to determine — that is, of his neighbors, fellows, associates, persons having the same legal status in society as that which he holds.
[/quote]
Ok – you realize that case is from the1800s, right? And I won’t bother addressing your other points which I assume are supposed to be humor -[/quote]
I do realize that. Do SCOTUS decisions have an expiration date?
And no humor intended. I was just adding some details.